integrated course design for outcomes based education (obe) ruth a. streveler & karl a. smith...

Integrated Course Design for Outcomes Based Education (OBE)

Ruth A. Streveler & Karl A. SmithSchool of Engineering Education

Purdue University

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

May 2010

2

Workshop Layout• Welcome & Overview

• Integrated Course Design (CAP Model)– Content – Assessment – Pedagogy (Pellegrino)

• Backward Design – Understanding by Design (Wiggins and McTighe)

• Integrated Course Design (Fink)• Learning Objectives

– Taxonomies

• Pedagogies of Engagement – Active and Cooperative Learning

3

It could well be that faculty members of the twenty-first century college or university will find it necessary to set aside their roles as teachers and instead become designers of learning experiences, processes, and environments.

James Duderstadt, 1999 [Nuclear Engineering Professor; Dean, Provost and President of the University of Michigan]

4

Key Resource

http://www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm

http://www.skillscommission.org/co



5

Some Important Principles About Learning and Understanding

The first important principle about how people learn is that students come to the classroom with preconceptions about how the world works which include beliefs and prior knowledge acquired through various experiences.

The second important principle about how people learn is that to develop competence in an area of inquiry, students must: (a) have a deep foundation of factual knowledge, (b) understand facts and ideas in the context of a conceptual framework, and (c) organize knowledge in ways that facilitate retrieval and application.

A third critical idea about how people learn is that a “metacognitive” approach to instruction can help students learn to take control of their own learning by defining learning goals and monitoring their progress in achieving them.

Jim Pellegrino (2006) – Rethinking and redesigning curriculum, instruction and assessment: What contemporary research and theory suggests. http://www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm

6

Workshop Learning Goal• Participants will understand Content-

Assessment-Pedagogy Integrated Design (backward design), and how curriculum, assessment, and instruction should be aligned for significant learning in STEM courses.

• Participants will understand that instructional design evolves backward from clear goals and is aligned across all three stages of backward design.

7

Workshop ObjectivesParticipants will be able to:

• Apply the principles of backward design in developing a course.

• Describe and distinguish two approaches to instructional design that incorporate backward design.– Understanding by Design (Wiggins and

McTighe)– Integrated Course Design (Fink)

• Understand the concept of alignment.• Develop learning goals and objectives

based on Bloom’s Taxonomy.

88

Integrated Course Design Model• Pellegrino, J. (2006). Curriculum-Instruction-Assessment

Triad – http://www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm

• Understanding By Design - Backward Design Approach – Course, Class Session, and Learning Module Design: From Objectives and Evidence to Instruction (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998 and Bransford, Vye & Bateman, 2002)

• Fink. L.D. 2003. Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing. Jossey-Bass– Self Directed Guide:

http://www.deefinkandassociates.com/GuidetoCourseDesignAug05.pdf




Reflection and Dialogue

• Consider a course you recently taught (or are planning to teach).– Write a description of how you developed this course. – What was your approach to instructional design?

• What are the strengths of this approach? • What are the weaknesses of this approach?

• Discuss with your neighbor for about 3 minutes

Common Instructional Design Approach

Choose Text

Identify Chapters Covered

Develop Lectures

Create Exams

Workshop Layout

• Welcome & Overview




– Taxonomies


12

Backward Design ApproachWiggins & McTighe

Stage 1. Identify Desired Results• Enduring understanding• Important to know and do• Worth being familiar with

Stage 2. Determine Acceptable Evidence

Stage 3. Plan Learning Experiences and Instruction

From: Wiggins, Grant and McTighe, Jay. 1998. Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

3 Stages of Backward Design

Are the desired results, assessments, and learning activities ALIGNED?

Identify the Desired Results

Determine Acceptable Evidence

Plan Learning Experiences






What should students know, understand, and be able to do?






How will we know if the students have achieved the desired results? What will be accepted as evidence of student understanding and proficiency?






What activities will equip students with the needed knowledge and skills? What materials and resources will be useful?

Backward Design vs. Experimental Design






Develop Hypothesis

Plan Experiments

Do the experiments address the hypothesis?

and Think

Revisit your description of instructional design. How does your approach compare with backward design? What are the similarities? What are the differences?

Problems with Traditional Design

Hands-on without Minds-on

• Activity oriented• Engaging• Lack explicit focus

Coverage

• How many chapters will be covered?

• Which pages will we be covered?

•What’s the point?•What’s the big idea?•What does this help us understand or be able to do?•Why should we learn this?

Understanding by Design (UbD) focuses on BIG IDEAS.

To understand a topic or subject is to use knowledge in sophisticated, flexible ways. Knowledge and skill are necessary elements of understanding, but they are not synonymous with understanding. Matters of understanding require more: Students need to make conscious sense and apt use of the knowledge they are learning and the principles underlying it.

-Understanding by Design Wiggins and McTighe (1998)

Understanding Big Ideas

22

Key Resource

http://books.google.com/books?id=N2EfKlyUN4QC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_v2_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q=&f=false

6 Facets of Understanding

• Explanation

• Interpretation

• Application

• Perspective

• Empathy

• Self-Knowledge

UbD is a backward design process used to achieve this enduring understanding.

G: What is the overall goal of the unit or topic?

U: What enduring understanding about big ideas should the students gain?

The Understanding by Design Handbook, Chapter 4: Module 4: Identifying Enduring Understandings

Backward Design

Stage 1. Identify Desired Results

Filter 1. To what extent does the idea, topic, or process represent a big idea or having enduring value beyond the classroom?

Filter 2. To what extent does the idea, topic, or process reside at the heart of the discipline?

Filter 3. To what extent does the idea, topic, or process require uncoverage?

Filter 4. To what extent does the idea, topic, or process offer potential for engaging

students?

UbD Filters for Curricular Priorities

• Are the topics enduring and transferable big ideas having value beyond the classroom?

• Are the topics big ideas and core processes at the heart of the discipline?

• Are the topics abstract, counterintuitive, often misunderstood, or easily misunderstood ideas requiring coverage?

• Are the topics big ideas embedded in facts, skills and activities?

Understanding by Design, pp. 10-11

Q: What questions will frame teaching and learning?

K, S: What will students know and be able to do (skills)?

Essential Questions

• Framed to provoke and sustain interest.

• Recur naturally.

• Address conceptual foundations of a discipline.

• Raise other important questions.

• Have no one obvious right answer but serve as a doorway into focused discussion, inquiry, and research.

T: What are key performance tasks that would indicate understanding?

OE: What other evidence will be collected to assess learning and understanding?

UbD Authentic Assessment:GRASPS

• Goal: What is goal of the performance task?• Role: What is the role of the students?• Audience: Who is the target audience for the

finished product?• Situation: What is the situation or context?• Performance (or Product): What will be

performed or produced?• Standards: By what standards will the work

be assessed?

Use 6 Facets of Understanding to Reveal Student Understanding

Facet Ways of Demonstrating Understanding

Explanation Explain, teach; Give examples of; Make connections with; Describe how; Prove

Interpretation Interpret; Make sense of; Proved analogy for; Show the importance or meaning of

Application In new situation, apply; Show or demonstrate; Use in the context of; Design

Perspective Analyze; See from a point of view; Compare/contrast; Critique

Empathy Walk in the shoes of; Experience directly and see; Reach a common understanding concerning; Consider the seemingly odd view

Self knowledge Recognize your prejudice about; Identify the lens through which you view; See how your habits influence your approach; Explain how you came to understand

Understanding by Design, pp. 158-159

Engaging and Effective Instruction: WHERETO

• Where is the unit headed?• How will the students be hooked?• How will students explore or experience key

ideas?• How will students rethink and revise?• How will students evaluate their work?• How will work be tailored to a diverse student

population?• How will the work be organized?

and Think, Pair and Share

Evaluate the UbD instructional design method based on your individual needs. What are the pros/cons of this method? What features could you employ immediately? Write down your response.

Pair up with another workshop participant and discuss your evaluations. What are the similarities and differences?

Course Concept Mapping

• Construct a concept map that represents the key concepts and relationships between ideas for the course you are re-designing

How to construct a concept map

Central Node BIG idea at the heart of the

discipline

Most important outcome for the course

Surrounding Nodes Related ideas, topics, etc.

Nature of the connection (relationship) between the nodes Ruíz-Primo, M. (2000). On the use of concept maps as an

assessment tool in science: What we have learned so far. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 2 (1).

Concept Maps Software Tools

• Cmap Tools (http:// cmap.ihmc.us) Institute for Human &Machine Cognition Free downloadable program

• C-Tools (http://ctools.msu.edu) Michigan State University (NSF funded) Free web-based Java applet

• SMART Ideas (http://www2.smarttech.com) SMART Tech Free trial version (30 days)

Discuss your Concept Maps

Workshop Layout





– Taxonomies


Integrated Course Design

Teachingand

Learning Activities

Learning Goals

Feedbackand

Assessment

Situational Factors

Integrated Course Design

• Initial Phase: Build Strong Primary Components

• Intermediate Phase: Assemble the components into a Coherent Whole

• Final Phase: Finish Important Remaining Tasks

Initial Phase: Build Strong Primary Components

1. Identify situational factors.

2. Identify learning goals.

3. Develop feedback and assessment.

4. Select teaching and learning activities.

5. Make sure primary components are integrated.

4949

Worksheet 1Worksheet for Designing a Course/Class Session/Learning Module

Ways of Assessing Actual Teaching-Learning Helpful Resources:

Learning Goals for Course/Session/Learning Module:

This Kind of Learning: Activities: (e.g., people, things)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

What key information should students understand and remember?

What kinds of thinking are important?What skills should students learn?

What connections should students recognize and make?

What should students learn about themselves or about interacting with others?

What changes or values do you want students to adopt?

What aspects of metacognition should students learn?

Feedback and Assessment

• Forward Looking Assessment– Questions that incorporate course concepts in a

real-life context• Criteria and Standards

– What traits or characteristics are indicative of high quality work?

• Self-Assessment– Allow students to gauge their own learning.

• FIDeLity Feedback– Frequent, Immediate, Discriminating, Lovingly

delivered

Are steps 1-4 integrated?

• What conflicts may arise due to situational factors?

• Are the learning goals complete? Do students receive feedback about all learning goals?

• Do the activities support all learning goals?• Does the feedback loop prepare students for

understanding the criteria and standards that will be used to assess their performance?

• Do practice activities provide the opportunity for self –evaluation and prepare students for later assessment activities?

Intermediate Phase: Assembling Components

6. Course Structure: Divide semester into segments that focus on key concepts or topics.

7. Instructional Strategy: Devise a set of learning activities in a particular sequence so learning progresses.

8. Overall Scheme: Integrate the course structure (from first phase) with instructional strategy.

Final Phase: Remaining Tasks

9. Identify the key components of the grading system.

10.Identify potential problems.

11.Develop a syllabus.

12.Develop an evaluation plan to determine how you will assess the course.

and Think, Pair and Share

Evaluate the Integrated Course Design method based on your individual needs and compared to UbD. What are the pros/cons of this method? What features could you employ immediately? Are there aspects of either method that your prefer? Write down your response.

Pair up with another workshop participant and discuss your evaluations. What are the similarities and differences?

Workshop Layout





– Taxonomies


Purpose of Learning Objectives

• Guide instructors through backward design.

• Students know what is expected of them.

• Allows assessment of teaching AND learning.

What is the difference between learning goals and objectives?

GOALS

• A broad or general description of what students will know understand or be able to do.

• Help focus on the big picture.

OBJECTIVES

• A description of what students are expected to achieve or will be able to do.

• Specific• Measurable

Learning Objectives Rubric

Learning Objective Domains

• Cognitive: knowledge and development of intellectual skills

• Affective: the way we deal with things emotionally

• Psychomotor: physical movement, coordination, use of motor-skill areas

Taxonomies of Types of Learning

Facets of understanding (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998)

Taxonomy of significant learning (Fink, 2003)

Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive Domain (Bloom & Krathwohl, 1956)

A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).

Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Biggs & Collis, 1982)

The Six Major Levels of Bloom's Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain(with representative behaviors and sample objectives)

Knowledge. Remembering information Define, identify, label, state, list, match Identify the standard peripheral components of a computer Write the equation for the Ideal Gas Law

Comprehension. Explaining the meaning of information Describe, generalize, paraphrase, summarize, estimate

In one sentence explain the main idea of a written passage Describe in prose what is shown in graph form

Application. Using abstractions in concrete situations Determine, chart, implement, prepare, solve, use, develop

Using principles of operant conditioning, train a rate to press a bar

Derive a kinetic model from experimental data Analysis. Breaking down a whole into component parts Points out, differentiate,

distinguish, discriminate, compare Identify supporting evidence to support the interpretation of a literary passage Analyze an oscillator circuit and determine the frequency of oscillation

Synthesis. Putting parts together to form a new and integrated whole Create, design, plan, organize, generate, write

Write a logically organized essay in favor of euthanasia Develop an individualized nutrition program for a diabetic patient

Evaluation. Making judgments about the merits of ideas, materials, or phenomena Appraise, critique, judge, weigh, evaluate, select

Assess the appropriateness of an author's conclusions based on the evidence given Select the best proposal for a proposed water treatment plant

(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).

Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create

Factual Knowledge – The basic elements that students must know to be acquainted with a discipline or solve problems in it.

a. Knowledge of terminology

b. Knowledge of specific details and elements

Conceptual Knowledge – The interrelationships among the basic elements within a larger structure that enable them to function together.

a. Knowledge of classifications and categories

b. Knowledge of principles and generalizations

c. Knowledge of theories, models, and structures

Procedural Knowledge – How to do something; methods of inquiry, and criteria for using skills, algorithms, techniques, and methods.

a. Knowledge of subject-specific skills and algorithms

b. Knowledge of subject-specific techniques and methods

c. Knowledge of criteria for determining when to use appropriate procedures

Metacognitive Knowledge – Knowledge of cognition in general as well as awareness and knowledge of one’s own cognition.

a. Strategic knowledge

b. Knowledge about cognitive tasks, including appropriate contextual and conditional knowledge

c. Self-knowledge

The Cognitive Process DimensionThe Cognitive Process Dimension

Th

e K

now

led

ge D

imen

sion

Th

e K

now

led

ge D

imen

sion

Distinguish

Compare

Contrast

Deduce

Analyze

Breaking material into its

constituent parts and detecting how the

parts relate to

one another

and to an overall

structure or purpose

Employ

Translate

Demonstrate

Examine

Apply

Carrying out or

using a procedure in a given situation

Arrange

Combine

Construct

Propose

Select

Defend

Interpret

Discriminate

Restate

Describe

Identify

Express

Recall

Define

Relate

Review

Create

Putting elements together to form a

novel, coherent whole or make an original product

Evaluate

Making judgments based on

criteria and standards

Understand

Determining the meaning

of instructional messages, including

oral, written, and graphic communicati

on.

Remember

Retrieving relevant

knowledge from long-

term memory





c. Self-knowledge












The K

now

ledge D

imen

sion

The K

now

ledge D

imen

sion

http://www.uwsp.edu/education/lwilson/curric/newtaxonomy.htm

AbstractAbstract

ConcreteConcrete

Bloom’s Taxonomy

Modified from Bloom 1956; Krathwohl 2001

http://mrwheeler.com/Pipelinepaperwork/BloomPictures/blooms%20taxonomy.png

Working Session

• Identify one or two big ideas from your course.

• Articulate learning goals for these ideas.

• Develop up to 5 learning objectives that will indicate attainment of the learning goals.

• Peer review using rubric.

• Revise learning objectives.

76

Backward Design Approach:

• Desired Results (Outcomes, Objectives, Learning Goals)– 5 minute university

• Evidence (Assessment)– Learning Taxonomies

• Plan Instruction– Cooperative Learning Planning Format &

Forms

77

Taxonomies of Types of Learning

Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives: Cognitive Domain (Bloom & Krathwohl, 1956)

A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).

Facets of understanding (Wiggins & McTighe, 1998)

Taxonomy of significant learning (Fink, 2003)

Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Biggs & Collis, 1982)

A taxonomic trek: From student learning to faculty scholarship (Shulman, 2002)

78

The Six Major Levels of Bloom's Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain(with representative behaviors and sample objectives)

Knowledge. Remembering information Define, identify, label, state, list, match Identify the standard peripheral components of a computer Write the equation for the Ideal Gas Law

Comprehension. Explaining the meaning of information Describe, generalize, paraphrase, summarize, estimate

In one sentence explain the main idea of a written passage Describe in prose what is shown in graph form

Application. Using abstractions in concrete situations Determine, chart, implement, prepare, solve, use, develop

Using principles of operant conditioning, train a rate to press a bar

Derive a kinetic model from experimental data Analysis. Breaking down a whole into component parts Points out, differentiate,

distinguish, discriminate, compare Identify supporting evidence to support the interpretation of a literary passage Analyze an oscillator circuit and determine the frequency of oscillation

Synthesis. Putting parts together to form a new and integrated whole Create, design, plan, organize, generate, write

Write a logically organized essay in favor of euthanasia Develop an individualized nutrition program for a diabetic patient

Evaluation. Making judgments about the merits of ideas, materials, or phenomena Appraise, critique, judge, weigh, evaluate, select

Assess the appropriateness of an author's conclusions based on the evidence given Select the best proposal for a proposed water treatment plant

79(Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001).

80

Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create















c. Self-knowledge


Th

e K

now

led

ge D

imen

sion

Th

e K

now

led

ge D

imen

sion

81

Distinguish

Compare

Contrast

Deduce

Analyze

Breaking material into its

constituent parts and detecting how the

parts relate to

one another

and to an overall

structure or purpose

Employ

Translate

Demonstrate

Examine

Apply

Carrying out or

using a procedure in a given situation

Arrange

Combine

Construct

Propose

Select

Defend

Interpret

Discriminate

Restate

Describe

Identify

Express

Recall

Define

Relate

Review

Create

Putting elements together to form a

novel, coherent whole or make an original product

Evaluate

Making judgments based on

criteria and standards

Understand

Determining the meaning

of instructional messages, including

oral, written, and graphic communicati

on.

Remember

Retrieving relevant

knowledge from long-

term memory


82




c. Self-knowledge












The K

now

ledge D

imen

sion

The K

now

ledge D

imen

sion

83

Facets of UnderstandingWiggins & McTighe, 1998, page 44

When we truly understand, weCan explain - cognitiveCan interpret - cognitiveCan apply - cognitiveHave perspective - affectiveCan empathize - affectiveHave self-knowledge -

metacognitive

Dee Fink – Creating Significant Learning Experiences

A TAXONOMY OF SIGNIFICANT LEARNING

1. Foundational Knowledge

• "Understand and remember" learning

For example: facts, terms, formulae, concepts, principles, etc.

2. Application

Thinking: critical, creative, practical (problem-solving, decision-making)

Other skills

For example: communication, technology, foreign language

Managing complex projects

3. Integration

Making "connections" (i.e., finding similarities or interactions) . . .

Among: ideas, subjects, people

4. Human Dimensions

Learning about and changing one's SELF

Understanding and interacting with OTHERS

5. Caring

Identifying/changing one's feelings, interests, values

6. Learning How to Learn

Becoming a better student

Learning how to ask and answer questions

Becoming a self-directed learner

Cognitive

Affective

Meta

85

Backward DesignStage 3. Plan Learning Experiences & Instruction

• What enabling knowledge (facts, concepts, and principles) and skills (procedures) will students need to perform effectively and achieve desired results?

• What activities will equip students with the needed knowledge and skills?

• What will need to be taught and coached, and how should it be taught, in light of performance goals?

• What materials and resources are best suited to accomplish these goals?

• Is the overall design coherent and effective?

86

Session Summary(Minute Paper)

Reflect on the session:1.Most useful/helpful idea?2.Taxonomy you’re using? 3.Muddiest point?

4.Pace: Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast5.Relevance: Little 1 . . . 5 Lots6.Format: Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah

87

Q4 – Pace: Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast (3.0)Q5 – Relevance: Little 1 . . . 5 Lots (4.1)Q6 – Format: Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah (4.0)

0

5

10

15

20

Q4 Q5 Q6

1

2

3

4

5

LTU – May 17, 2010 – Session 1 (am)

Workshop Layout





– Taxonomies


89

Session Objectives• Participants will be able to :

– Describe Key Features of Cooperative learning– Explain rationale for Cooperative Learning– Summarize approaches to cooperative learning

• Formal and Informal Cooperative Learning

– Integrate Cooperative learning with key features of the Backward Design process – Content (outcomes) – Assessment - Pedagogy

– Identify connections between cooperative learning and desired outcomes of courses and programs• Participants will begin applying key elements to the design on a course, class session

or learning module

90

“Throughout the whole enterprise, the core issue, in my view, is the mode of teaching and learning that is practiced. Learning ‘about’ things does not enable students to acquire the abilities and understanding they will need for the twenty-first century. We need new pedagogies of engagement that will turn out the kinds of resourceful, engaged workers and citizens that America now requires.”

Russ Edgerton (reflecting on higher education projects funded by the Pew Memorial Trust)

91

Student Engagement Research Evidence

• Perhaps the strongest conclusion that can be made is the least surprising. Simply put, the greater the student’s involvement or engagement in academic work or in the academic experience of college, the greater his or her level of knowledge acquisition and general cognitive development …(Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005).

• Active and collaborative instruction coupled with various means to encourage student engagement invariably lead to better student learning outcomes irrespective of academic discipline (Kuh et al., 2005, 2007).

See Smith, et.al, 2005 and Fairweather, 2008, Linking Evidence and Promising Practices in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Undergraduate Education - http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Fairweather_CommissionedPaper.pdf

January 2, 2009—Science, Vol. 323 www.sciencemag.org

Calls for evidence-based teaching practices

MIT & Harvard – Engaged Pedagogy

January 13, 2009—New York Timeshttp://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/us/13physics.html?em

http://web.mit.edu/edtech/casestudies/teal.html#video

http://www.ncsu.edu/PER/scaleup.html

95

Pedagogies of Engagement

96

The American College Teacher: National Norms for 2007-2008

Methods Used in “All” or “Most”

All – 2005

All – 2008

Assistant - 2008

Cooperative Learning

48 59 66

Group Projects 33 36 61

Grading on a curve

19 17 14

Term/research papers

35 44 47

http://www.heri.ucla.edu/index.php

Reflection and Dialogue

• Individually reflect on Cooperative Learning Experiences, especially successes. Write for about 1 minute– Context? Subject, Year, School– Structure/Procedure? What did you do/experience?– Outcome? Evidence of Success

• Discuss with your neighbor for about 2 minutes– Select Success Story, Comment, Question, etc. that

you would like to present to the whole group if you are randomly selected

98

Active Learning: Cooperation in the College Classroom

• Informal Cooperative Learning Groups

• Formal Cooperative Learning Groups

• Cooperative Base Groups

See Cooperative Learning Handout (CL College-804.doc)

Resources• Fairweather (2008) Linking Evidence and Promising

Practices in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Undergraduate Education - http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Fairweather_CommissionedPaper.pdf

• Smith, K. A., Douglas, T. C., & Cox, M. 2009. Supportive teaching and learning strategies in STEM education. In R. Baldwin, (Ed.). Improving the climate for undergraduate teaching in STEM fields. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117, 19-32. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Smith, K.A., Sheppard, S.D., Johnson, D.W. and Johnson, R.T. 2005. Pedagogies of engagement: Classroom-based practices. Journal of Engineering Education [Smith-Pedagogies_of_Engagement.pdf]

http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Fairweather_CommissionedPaper.pdf

http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Fairweather_CommissionedPaper.pdf

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122268048/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/Smith-Pedagogies_of_Engagement.pdf

http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/Smith-Pedagogies_of_Engagement.pdf

100






Cooperative Learning is instruction that involves people working in teams to accomplish a common goal, under conditions that involve both positive interdependence (all members must cooperate to complete the task) and individual and group accountability (each member is accountable for the complete final outcome).

Key Concepts

•Positive Interdependence•Individual and Group Accountability•Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction•Teamwork Skills•Group Processing

102

http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith/docs/Smith-CL%20Handout%2008.pdf

103

Book Ends on a Class Session

Book Ends on a Class Session

1. Advance Organizer2. Formulate-Share-Listen-Create (Turn-

to-your-neighbor) -- repeated every 10-12 minutes

3. Session Summary (Minute Paper)1. What was the most useful or meaningful thing you

learned during this session?2. What question(s) remain uppermost in your mind as we

end this session?3. What was the “muddiest” point in this session?

105

Advance Organizer“The most important single factor influencing learning is what the learner already knows. Ascertain this and teach him accordingly.”

David Ausubel - Educational psychology: A cognitive approach, 1968.

106

Quick Thinks

•Reorder the steps•Paraphrase the idea•Correct the error•Support a statement•Select the response

Johnston, S. & Cooper,J. 1997. Quick thinks: Active- thinking in lecture classes and televised instruction. Cooperative learning and college teaching, 8(1), 2-7.

107

Formulate-Share-Listen-Create

Informal Cooperative Learning GroupIntroductory Pair Discussion of a

FOCUS QUESTION

1. Formulate your response to the question individually

2. Share your answer with a partner3. Listen carefully to your partner's answer4. Work together to Create a new answer

through discussion

108

Minute Paper• What was the most useful or meaningful thing

you learned during this session?• What question(s) remain uppermost in your

mind as we end this session?• What was the “muddiest” point in this session?• Give an example or application• Explain in your own words . . .

Angelo, T.A. & Cross, K.P. 1993. Classroom assessment techniques: A handbook for college teachers. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

109

Session Summary(Minute Paper)

Reflect on the session:

1. Most interesting, valuable, useful thing you learned.

2. Things that helped you learn.

3. Question, comments, suggestions.

4. Pace: Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast5. Relevance: Little 1 . . . 5 Lots6. Instructional Format: Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah

Q4 – Pace: Too slow 1 . . . . 5 Too fast (2.6)Q5 – Relevance: Little 1 . . . 5 Lots (4.5)Q6 – Format: Ugh 1 . . . 5 Ah (4.3)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Q4 Q5 Q6

1

2

3

4

5

MSU STEMES – 2010 – Session 1 (5/20/10)

111

Informal CL (Book Ends on a Class Session) with Concept Tests

Physics Peer InstructionEric Mazur - Harvard – http://galileo.harvard.edu

Peer Instruction – www.prenhall.comRichard Hake – http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/

Chemistry Chemistry ConcepTests - UW Madison

www.chem.wisc.edu/~conceptVideo: Making Lectures Interactive with ConcepTests

ModularChem Consortium – http://mc2.cchem.berkeley.edu/

STEMTECVideo: How Change Happens: Breaking the “Teach as You Were Taught” Cycle – Films for the Humanities & Sciences – www.films.com

HarvardThinking Together & From Questions to Concepts Interactive Teaching in Physics: Derek Bok Center – www.fas.harvard.edu/~bok_cen/

112

The “Hake” Plot of FCI

Pretest (Percent)

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

30.00

35.00

20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00

ALS

SDI

WP

PI(HU)

ASU(nc)

ASU(c)

HU

WP*

UMn Traditional

XUMn Cooperative Groups

XUMn-CL+PS

Richard Hake (Interactive engagement vs traditional methods) http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/

Traditional (lecture)

Interactive (active/cooperative)

<g> = Concept Inventory Gain/Total

115

Physics (Mechanics) Concepts:The Force Concept Inventory (FCI)

• A 30 item multiple choice test to probe student's understanding of basic concepts in mechanics.

• The choice of topics is based on careful thought about what the fundamental issues and concepts are in Newtonian dynamics.

• Uses common speech rather than cueing specific physics principles.

• The distractors (wrong answers) are based on students' common inferences.

Informal CooperativeLearning Groups

Can be used at any timeCan be short term and ad hocMay be used to break up a long lectureProvides an opportunity for students to process material they have been listening to (Cognitive Rehearsal)Are especially effective in large lecturesInclude "book ends" procedureAre not as effective as Formal Cooperative Learning or Cooperative Base Groups

Strategies for Energizing Large

Classes: From Small Groups to

Learning Communities:

Jean MacGregor,James Cooper,

Karl Smith,Pamela Robinson

New Directions for Teaching and Learning,

No. 81, 2000.Jossey- Bass

118






Formal Cooperative Learning Task Groups

120

http://www.aacu.org/advocacy/leap/documents/Re8097abcombined.pdf

121

Top Three Main Engineering Work Activities

Engineering Total• Design – 36%• Computer

applications – 31%• Management –

29%

Civil/Architectural• Management – 45%• Design – 39%• Computer

applications – 20%

Burton, L., Parker, L, & LeBold, W. 1998. U.S. engineering career trends. ASEE Prism, 7(9), 18-21.

122

Teamwork Skills

•Communication• Listening and Persuading

•Decision Making•Conflict Management•Leadership•Trust and Loyalty

123

Ideo's five-point model for strategizing by design: Hit the StreetsRecruit T-Shaped PeopleBuild to ThinkThe Prototype Tells a StoryDesign Is Never Done

Design Thinking

Discipline

Thin

king

Tom FriedmanHorizontalizeOurselves

CQ+PQ>IQ

AAC&U College LearningFor the New Global Century

124http://www.stanford.edu/group/dschool/big_picture/our_vision.html

Design team failure is usually due to failed team dynamics (Leifer, Koseff & Lenshow, 1995).

It’s the soft stuff that’s hard, the hard stuff is easy(Doug Wilde, quoted in Leifer, 1997)

Professional Skills(Shuman, L., Besterfield-Sacre, M., and McGourty, J., “TheABET Professional Skills-Can They Be Taught? Can They Be Assessed?” Journal of Engineering Education, Vo. 94, No. 1, 2005, pp. 41–55.)

126

Pseudo-group

Traditional G roup

C ooperative G roup

H igh-perform ing C ooperative G roup

Individual M em bers

PE

RF

OR

MA

NC

E L

EV

EL

TYPE O F G R O U P

Teamwork

127

Characteristics of Effective Teams• respect for others•Open criticism•Common goals•Good, clear communication•Passion for the subject or work•Loyalty to the group – not wanting to let others down•Good listening•Motivation•Trusting that others will do their job•Challenging one another respectively•Defined roles•Different perspectives or experiences – complementary (and valuing them)•Commitment•Willingness to compromise•Bring level of competence•Appropriate roles•Agreement (buy in) on the roles

A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable

• SMALL NUMBER

• COMPLEMENTARY SKILLS

• COMMON PURPOSE & PERFORMANCE GOALS

• COMMON APPROACH

• MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY

--Katzenbach & Smith (1993)The Wisdom of Teams

129

Hackman – Leading Teams

• Real Team• Compelling Direction• Enabling Structure• Supportive

Organizational Context

• Available Expert Coaching

https://research.wjh.harvard.edu/TDS/

Team Diagnostic Survey (TDS)

Team Charter

• Team name, membership, and roles• Team Mission Statement• Anticipated results (goals)• Specific tactical objectives• Ground rules/Guiding principles for

team participation• Shared expectations/aspirations

Code of Cooperation

•EVERY member is responsible for the team’s progress and success.•Attend all team meetings and be on time.•Come prepared.•Carry out assignments on schedule.•Listen to and show respect for the contributions of other members; be an active listener.•CONSTRUCTIVELY criticize ideas, not persons.•Resolve conflicts constructively,•Pay attention, avoid disruptive behavior.•Avoid disruptive side conversations.•Only one person speaks at a time.•Everyone participates, no one dominates.•Be succinct, avoid long anecdotes and examples.•No rank in the room.•Respect those not present.•Ask questions when you do not understand.•Attend to your personal comfort needs at any time but minimize team disruption.•HAVE FUN!!•?

Adapted from Boeing Aircraft Group Team Member Training Manual

132

Ten Commandments: An Affective Code of Cooperation

• Help each other be right, not wrong.• Look for ways to make new ideas work, not for reasons they won't.• If in doubt, check it out! Don't make negative assumptions about each other.• Help each other win, and take pride in each other's victories.• Speak positively about each other and about your organization at every opportunity.• Maintain a positive mental attitude no matter what the circumstances.• Act with initiative and courage, as if it all depends on you.• Do everything with enthusiasm; it's contagious.• Whatever you want; give it away.• Don't lose faith.• Have fun

Ford Motor Company

133

Group Ground Rules Contract Form (Adapted from a form developed by Dr. Deborah Allen, University of Delaware)

Project groups are an effective aid to learning, but to work best they require that all groups members clearly understand their responsibilities to one another. These project group ground rules describe the general responsibilities of every member to the group. You can adopt additional ground rules if your group believes they are needed. Your signature on this contract form signifies your commitment to adhere to these rules and expectations. All group members agree to:

1. Come to class and team meetings on time. 2. Come to class and team meetings with assignments and other necessary

preparations done. Additional ground rules:

1.

2. If a member of the project team repeatedly fails to meet these ground rules, other members of the group are expected to take the following actions: Step 1: (fill in this step with your group) If not resolved: Step 2: Bring the issue to the attention of the teaching team. If not resolved: Step 3: Meet as a group with the teaching team. The teaching team reserves the right to make the final decisions to resolve difficulties that arise within the groups. Before this becomes necessary, the team should try to find a fair and equitable solution to the problem. Member’s Signatures: Group Number:______________ 1.____________________________ 2.____________________________

3.____________________________ 4.____________________________

Group Processing Plus/Delta Format

Plus (+)Things That Group Did Well

Delta (Δ)Things Group Could Improve

135

Professor's Role inFormal Cooperative Learning

1. Specifying Objectives

2. Making Decisions

3. Explaining Task, Positive Interdependence, and Individual Accountability

4. Monitoring and Intervening to Teach Skills

5. Evaluating Students' Achievement and Group Effectiveness

Formal Cooperative Learning – Types of Tasks

1. Jigsaw – Learning new conceptual/procedural material

2. Peer Composition or Editing

3. Reading Comprehension/Interpretation

4. Problem Solving, Project, or Presentation

5. Review/Correct Homework

6. Constructive Academic Controversy

7. Group Tests

137

Challenged-Based Learning• Problem-based learning

• Case-based learning

• Project-based learning

• Learning by design

• Inquiry learning

• Anchored instructionJohn Bransford, Nancy Vye and Helen Bateman. Creating High-Quality

Learning Environments: Guidelines from Research on How People Learn

Challenge-Based Instruction with the Legacy Cycle

LegacyCycle

The Challenges

Generate Ideas

Multiple Perspectives

Research & Revise

Test Your Mettle

Go Public

138https://repo.vanth.org/portal/public-content/star-legacy-cycle/star-legacy-cycle

139

Problem-Based Learning

Problem posed

Identify what weneed to know

Learn it

Apply it

START

140

Problem Based Cooperative Learning FormatTASK: Solve the problem(s) or Complete the project.

INDIVIDUAL: Estimate answer. Note strategy.

COOPERATIVE: One set of answers from the group, strive for agreement, make sure everyone is able to explain the strategies used to solve each problem.

EXPECTED CRITERIA FOR SUCCESS: Everyone must be able to explain the strategies used to solve each problem.

EVALUATION: Best answer within available resources or constraints.

INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTABILITY: One member from your group may be randomly chosen to explain (a) the answer and (b) how to solve each problem.

EXPECTED BEHAVIORS: Active participating, checking, encouraging, and elaborating by all members.

INTERGROUP COOPERATION: Whenever it is helpful, check procedures, answers, and strategies with another group.

141 http://www.udel.edu/pbl/

142

Cooperative Base Groups

• Are Heterogeneous• Are Long Term (at least one quarter or

semester)• Are Small (3-5 members)• Are for support• May meet at the beginning of each session or

may meet between sessions• Review for quizzes, tests, etc. together• Share resources, references, etc. for individual

projects• Provide a means for covering for absentees

143

Design and Implementation of Cooperative Learning – Resources

• Design Framework – How People Learn (HPL)– Creating High Quality Learning Environments (Bransford, Vye & Bateman) --

http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309082927/html/

• Design & Backward Design Process (Felder & Brent, Fink and Wiggins & McTighe)– Pellegrino – Rethinking and redesigning curriculum, instruction and assessment: What

contemporary research and theory suggests. http://www.skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm

– Smith, K. A., Douglas, T. C., & Cox, M. 2009. Supportive teaching and learning strategies in STEM education. In R. Baldwin, (Ed.). Improving the climate for undergraduate teaching in STEM fields. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 117, 19-32. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

• Content Resources– Donald, Janet. 2002. Learning to think: Disciplinary perspectives. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.– Middendorf, Joan and Pace, David. 2004. Decoding the Disciplines: A Model for Helping

Students Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 98.• Pedagogies of Engagement - Instructional Format explanation and exercise to model

format and to engage workshop participants– Cooperative Learning (Johnson, Johnson & Smith)

• Smith web site – www.ce.umn.edu/~smith– University of Delaware PBL web site – www.udel.edu/pbl– PKAL – Pedagogies of Engagement – http://www.pkal.org/activities/PedagogiesOfEngagementSummit.cfm

– Fairweather (2008) Linking Evidence and Promising Practices in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Undergraduate Education - http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Fairweather_CommissionedPaper.pdf

http://www.nap.edu/openbook/0309082927/html/


http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122268048/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0

http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith

http://www.ce.umn.edu/~smith

http://www.udel.edu/pbl

http://www.pkal.org/activities/PedagogiesOfEngagementSummit.cfm

144

• We thank the National Science Foundation for funding the development of this short course through Expanding and sustaining research capacity in engineering and technology education: Building on successful programs for faculty and graduate students (NSF DUE-0817461).

• Special thanks to Cori Fata-Hartley and the 14th Annual Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Education Scholars (STEMES) Program – http://fod.msu.edu/springinstitute/stemes/about.asp for sharing slides with us.

• Workshop materials are posted on – CLEERhub.org

integrated course design for outcomes based education (obe) ruth a. streveler & karl a. smith...

Documents